The livestream will be available on womens.afl & the AFLW app. Join our live chat!
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Kuek, Treacy, Amiss, Jackson, Sturt. Great forward line to take into the wet.
100%. There’s no forwards punishing the opposition marking 40-50m out. Lacks any potency or ruthlessness.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
Hopefully Worner coming in is another certainty. He can also rotate off half back as well as the wing as hb is the position he's played the most at WAFL so I'd have Clark spending time on the wing too. If it's wet then they should bring Freddy back as a sub. He's not suited to the wet but his run could be handy late in the game. Drop Banfield, Henry, Sturt and O'Driscoll in my view. Then bring in Darcy, Worner, Aish and Erasmus into the 22. Then play Fyfe forward only and use Jackson, Erasmus and Johnson more in the middle with Brayshaw to spend time on a wing too. If Aish is not fit then bring in Wagner or Colyer to rotate wing even though neither play the role on a regular basis at WAFL level. We need another player outside of bringing in Worner who can rotate wing who runs hard defensively desperately or we'll be smashed on the outside again.
Funny thing was Port Adelaide dropped their captain Tom Jonas for a couple of weeks. Port keep winning.
It's weird, because I posted something interesting on the autopsy thread.
I wish Longmuir would at least try players in different positions when things aren't working. Johnson rotating forward and having more ground time onball and forward rather than wing is in my opinion something worth trying and he can kick well over long distances obviously. I'd rather Erasmus and Johnson in the team for entire games playing half forward and rotating onball then having both spend most of the time on the wings as they are already good at winning contested football so having them playing outside roles doesn't suit their natural games. I'd also rather Fyfe played forward predominately.
No one is arguing for Banfield to stay in over Sturt. I doubt you'll find a single person that thinks Banfield desreves to be in the team next week.
Hey Sturts dad, settle down.
So obviously Sturt takes Banfield’s role in the structure that was working pre-bye, Jackson as forward who can play mid/ruck as well, Amiss as #1 target inside 50, Treacy as human wrecking ball, who also presents up the ground to be a link player and Banfield/Sturt who can play 3rd tall when needed but also medium leading forward to draw opponents away from Amiss. There’s absolutely no structural reason to drop Sturt if Banners is dropped regardless of if Frederick comes back or not.
Regardless of if Freddy comes back or not? So a forwardline of Treacy, Amiss, Sturt, Jackson, Walters, Frederick, Switta, Schultz. That's eight players.
Couple on the bench....
Yep, that’s what we had pre bye, with Switta and Jackson spending plenty of time up the ground. As an added bonus, Sturt has spent minutes on the wing for peel before being called out the AFL squad, so could help cover for NOD if they dropped him and brought Erasmus into the team, Frederick has also spent some time on the wing so they could alternate if He’s fit as well
With Fyfe it probably is, but I think treacy could go out.
That's not what we had pre-bye. Walters was injured pre-bye.
For the Naam game he was out but we had all 8 in the Geelong game.
Okay hypocrite. No need resort to insults
